A draft report issued Wednesday following a federal government review concludes the $12-billion Pacific Northwest LNG project would harm harbour porpoises and cause adverse affects from greenhouse gases, but not from other components, including salmon. Koji Sasahara / The Associated Press Files

It will be considered a victory for the consortium led by Malaysian state-controlled Petronas, which has faced opposition to the project near Prince Rupert from some First Nations and environmentalists over the liquefied natural gas terminal’s possible effect on juvenile salmon.

The draft report is open for public comment until March 11, after which the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency will produce a final report.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s federal Liberal government has the final say on the project.

Pacific NorthWest LNG president and CEO Michael Culbert called it “extremely good news” that a draft report validates there will not be an adverse effect to fish or fish habitat from the project.

He said, however, that not until the federal cabinet has made a decision, will the shareholders of the consortium be in a position to make a final investment decision.

“We’ll have to go through and look at the impact of the conditions that have been recommended in this draft report — and determine not only the economic impact of those conditions but also potential impacts on timelines,” Culbert said in an interview.

The consortium — which includes investors from China, India, Japan and Brunei — had given conditional approval to the project eight months ago, pending federal go-ahead.

However, since then, the Conservative government was toppled by Trudeau’s Liberals, who have vowed more say for First Nations on natural resource projects. Energy companies, including Petronas, are also contending with continued low oil prices and have announced significant capital spending cuts.

B.C. Natural Gas Minister Rich Coleman also welcomed the draft report’s conclusions on salmon, but admitted B.C. will need to provide Ottawa an explanation on how it will deal with the report’s conclusion the project will increase the province’s greenhouse gas output by 8.5 per cent.

He said the province is urging the federal government to give it credit for items such as reduced flaring and continues to argue that B.C. should get environmental credit for selling LNG to countries like China, reducing the need for new coal-fired power plants.

That argument remains contentious among environmental groups, climate scientists and other governments.

With Shell recently announcing it will put off its decision on a proposed $40-billion LNG project in Kitimat until the end of 2016, the stakes are high for Christy Clark’s B.C. Liberal government, which has pegged its economic growth plan on building a nascent LNG export industry to Asia.

Woodfibre LNG’s much smaller LNG project near Squamish also remains on the books.

Clark recently lambasted what she called “the forces of no” for opposing resource projects, including Pacific NorthWest LNG. She made the statement after a coalition of more than 300 hereditary and elected chiefs, scientists, politicians, fisherman and others signed a declaration in Prince Rupert in January to protect Lelu Island, the proposed location of the Pacific NorthWest LNG terminal.

The coalition is opposed to Lelu Island over concerns the project will harm juvenile salmon that use eelgrass beds on Flora Bank adjacent to the island.

The Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition said it was disappointed in the draft report.

“It is an incredibly superficial report that omits critical peer-reviewed science that is key to properly assessing the true environmental impacts of the LNG project,” said Greg Horne, energy coordinator for the coalition. “Given the scientifically established importance of Flora Bank to Skeena salmon, to say that this project will not have significant adverse impacts on salmon is completely incorrect and shows us once again that the (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency) process is broken,” said Horne.

The agency’s 257-page draft report notes that a key area of public concern were effects on fish.

The draft report says one of 11 main environmental effects of the project is on marine fish and fish habitat from changes to water and sediment quality, loss of habitat, and physical injury or mortality.

However, the federal environmental agency noted that key mitigation measures include offsetting loss of fish habitat with new habitat and building towers for a bridge at the edge of Flora Bank to minimize sediment erosion.

The report said mitigation measures will serve as accommodation for potential effects on First Nations.

The federal agency also laid out more than 150 conditions that could mitigate the effects of the project that ran the gamut from air quality, wetlands, migratory birds and human health.

The conditions called for significant consultation with First Nations.

This Week's Flyers

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.